lost headers

Thu Aug 4 08:27:41 MST 2005

Sending TO each other.  Geez, it's early...

On 8/4/05, Erik Bixby <erik.bixby at gmail.com> wrote:
> RFCs aside, wouldn't something changing the message two users are
> sending two each be considered a bug?  Funny characters, and all...
> -Erik
> 
> On 8/4/05, Technomage <technomage-hawke at cox.net> wrote:
> > : this is a test header
> > : this is not an actual header
> > : if this had been a real header, you would have been instructed
> > : on what to do with them.
> >
> >
> > ok. this is new to me.
> >
> > so, if I were to place a number of lines above that started with a ":"
> > followed by a comment, some clients would interpret that as header info?
> >
> > btw, this e-mail is also a test.....
> >
> > On Thursday 04 August 2005 02:21, Joseph Sinclair wrote:
> > > I'm not missing anything, the information is just hidden from view.
> > > The first few lines (the ones with ":" characters) are being *properly*
> > > interpreted by Thunderbird as header lines, and those don't show unless I
> > > do a view source.
> > >
> > > The "tool" that's compressing out the blank lines between header fields is
> > > somewhere in the SMTP cloud between you and me.  I have no idea where, and
> > > no way of hunting that down.
> > >
> > > BTW Section 4.2 of RFC 2822 on the IETF web site states:
> > >     In the obsolete syntax, any amount of folding white space MAY be
> > >     inserted where the obs-FWS rule is allowed.  This creates the
> > >     possibility of having two consecutive "folds" in a line, and
> > >     therefore the possibility that a line which makes up a folded header
> > >     field could be composed entirely of white space.
> > >
> > > The EBNF in the spec states that a line with nothing but whitespace (i.e.
> > > tab or space) is allowed on input (compliant software should NEVER generate
> > > such a header), but a lot of older MTA's interpret that as "Blank Lines Are
> > > Allowed" on incoming messages. I know that's not perfect behavior, but
> > > speaking as someone who worked on MTA's about 15 years ago when the
> > > standing spec was RFC 822, a LOT of MTA's allowed completely blank lines,
> > > and a lot of other MTA's would remove those extra "fold" lines as a way of
> > > reducing message size without harming the content.  There are still a lot
> > > of MTA's out there that follow this, admittedly obsolete, reasoning, but
> > > there's also very little I can do to fix it, since I don't know which
> > > servers they are, and I couldn't do much about obsolete proprietary
> > > software even if I did.
> > >
> > > The point of all this is that it's a simple fix to just DON'T PUT LINES
> > > WITH ":" CHARACTERS IN THE FIRST LINE OF YOUR MESSAGE. Is it that hard to
> > > just accept that there are bad MTA's out there and take simple steps to
> > > avoid having them munge your message?
> > >
> > > I'm not asking you to do something terribly hard here, just to be a little
> > > more considerate when you put links in a message by prefacing them with
> > > something simple, like a line stating what the link is for.  It's not hard,
> > > and we're all used to doing simple things like this to work around flaws in
> > > widely used, but flawed, proprietary software (like IE).
> > >
> > > ==Joseph++
> > >
> > > Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 3 Aug 2005, Joseph Sinclair wrote:
> > > >> The User Agent isn't the only actor here.  The intervening mail
> > > >> servers are permitted to interpret the headers of the message as
> > > >> provided under section 4.2 of RFC 2822, and they're permitted to
> > > >> modify those headers to add trace information, reorder fields,,
> > > >> etc...  This is what's happening for me, and probably for some other
> > > >> people as well.
> > > >> One of more servers between you and me (at least 7 for the message
> > > >> below) is removing the blank line before your "fake" headers, and
> > > >> Thunderbird sees it, properly, as part of the header block.  According
> > > >> to the RFC 2822 spec, all conforming UA's SHOULD accept messages with
> > > >> blank lines between headers to accommodate sending UA's that are
> > > >> designed to the RFC 822 spec (which allowed this behavior).
> > > >
> > > > 4.2 is the wrong section (unless different rfc2822 are sectioned
> > > > differently).
> > > >
> > > > The problem is that my two extra lines are not part of the header :)
> > > >
> > > > Please quote the specific section that allows putting "a line with
> > > > nothing preceding the CRLF" between the real headers and more headers.
> > > >
> > > > I'll admit that I don't know the mail specs perfectly. But I do have
> > > > experience with email message parsing: I have done POP3 server
> > > > development for around six years and have maintained vm-pop3d for over
> > > > four years; taught mail server administration for over four years; and I
> > > > have read a lot of exim, postfix and sendmail MTA code and mail.local
> > > > MDA code (and other SMTP mailers) and wrote and use "mailout" SMTP-out
> > > > sendmail replacement.
> > > >
> > > >> Note, the replied messages below are NOT modified in any way, and your
> > > >> "fake" headers are not shown.  I don't just make this stuff up, and I
> > > >> rather resent your implication that I did.
> > > >
> > > > We should track down specifically what mail *tool* lost my important :)
> > > > email message. I agree with Kurt: it's a bug that needs to be reported.
> > > >
> > > > Please see
> > > > http://lists.plug.phoenix.az.us/lurker/message/20050804.005401.9719e855.e
> > > >n.html
> > > >
> > > > and
> > > > http://lists.plug.phoenix.az.us/lurker/message/20050804.013243.964e82c1.e
> > > >n.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Does anyone know where the lines were lost?
> > > >
> > > > I am interested in solving this. Other readers: please let me know if my
> > > > two lines were missing for you.
> > > >
> > > >  Jeremy C. Reed
> > > >
> > > >                  BSD News, BSD tutorials, BSD links
> > > >                 http://www.bsdnewsletter.com/
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------
> > > > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> > > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change  you mail settings:
> > > > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------
> > > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change  you mail settings:
> > > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> > ---------------------------------------------------
> > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change  you mail settings:
> > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >
>